The criminal justice system must make this law more clear if they expect it to have some effect and make use of it. One thing I don't understand is why the criminal justice system uses the three strikes law when it comes to juveniles. Its doesn't make perfect sense because a juvenile can get two strikes and then when they become and adult they can easily clear their records. So in other words, if you start early you can actually get five strikes before you are put away for good. This could be a problem for the advancement of the criminal system. .
"To say that the Three strikes and your out approach to crime is fundamentally flawed is at best an understatement of the obvious."#(Briggs, Jonathon). This quote was made from a student at Stanford and I agree with his statement. "This is simply the United States pushing California to be more precise on trying to find an answer to the escalating crime rates."#(Briggs, Jonathon). Yet all California is doing is putting away people for inconsiderate reasons and not solving the problem but making it worse and digging our states debt even deeper. It costs the state about $25,000 a year per inmate. Now it seems to me that taxpayers shouldn't suffer and have to pay for all that. In order for California to house these criminals they must build prison after prison. All this is doing is taking money out of our educational systems and other beneficial projects. The three strikes law seems to have its good side because it puts away several hardcore criminals. But what about the people who don't deserve to be put in jail for there third strike? This is causing overcrowded prisons, and therefore making California keep building them. .
A lot of people see the strike law as a form of cruel and unusual punishment. And at certain times I feel that I agree with this. In 1996 a California drug addict was sentenced to two 25 year terms for stealing $159 worth of video tapes after he had two previous felony convictions on his record.